Sounds like the description of my card. I have now 5 valid results.

Whats weird on your results you got small credits a few times.
Evenso you should add -sbs 256 to MB_cmdline.txt to speed up a little bit.

---

With each crime and every kindness we birth our future.

Done. Thanks for the advice.

Of course I forgot to check memory consumtion before the change. Now it is 384 mb static and 60 mb dynamic. Would be no problem if it would go higher.

Done. Thanks for the advice.

Of course I forgot to check memory consumtion before the change. Now it is 384 mb static and 60 mb dynamic. Would be no problem if it would go higher.

Currently allocated 145 MB for GPU buffers

---

With each crime and every kindness we birth our future.

I continually get an error message saying "can't resolve hostname"??? I am new at this so I'm sorry but I also don't know what other info. you need to go along with this.

Thanks,

Ron

---

So far I got only one validated workunit, but the card completed quite a bunch already without any problems from a user's perspective.

The "problem" I noticed it that the GPU load is quite stationary at about 75% +/- 5% percent and never reached 90% or more. I checked the GPU load via GPU Shark.

App is running very nice on my 5850.

But I noticed there are no .VLAR tasks yet.

http://setiweb.ssl.berkeley.edu/beta/results.php?hostid=55958

App is running very nice on my 5850.

But I noticed there are no .VLAR tasks yet.

http://setiweb.ssl.berkeley.edu/beta/results.php?hostid=55958

No VLARs beeing send to GPUs anymore.
Its a result for the NVidia fix at main i guess.

---

With each crime and every kindness we birth our future.

Eric wanted to fix this some time ago.
Don't know if he succeeded.

The "problem" I noticed it that the GPU load is quite stationary at about 75% +/- 5% percent and never reached 90% or more. I checked the GPU load via GPU Shark.

I got the GPU usage of my HD6870 up to 75%-80% (and rarely below) with

-sbs 512  -period_iterations_num 5 -unroll 7

This reduced the time the task from 38minutes to 26minutes: Task 11361409

Any suggestions how to get above 90%?

Any suggestions how to get above 90%?

Try the -hp High Priority cmdline,

Claggy

The "problem" I noticed it that the GPU load is quite stationary at about 75% +/- 5% percent and never reached 90% or more. I checked the GPU load via GPU Shark.

I got the GPU usage of my HD6870 up to 75%-80% (and rarely below) with

-sbs 512  -period_iterations_num 5 -unroll 7

This reduced the time the task from 38minutes to 26minutes: Task 11361409

Any suggestions how to get above 90%?

Cause you going into tuning area and seems to care about what your host doing you could consider to switch to anonymous platform that provides more opportunities for tweaking and tuning. For example, to run 2 tasks simultaneously.
Disadvantage: you will need to care about your host further and do needed upgrades manually (not a "set and forget" approach).
Beta mostly about correctness and compatibility, but if you proved already that app works stable and correctly in default config you can do further optimizations. If not I would recommend to stay with default config for now.

EDIT: btw, -unroll param doesn't defined for MB7 app and ignored. Remove it, it's for AP6 app.

The "problem" I noticed it that the GPU load is quite stationary at about 75% +/- 5% percent and never reached 90% or more. I checked the GPU load via GPU Shark.

I got the GPU usage of my HD6870 up to 75%-80% (and rarely below) with

-sbs 512  -period_iterations_num 5 -unroll 7

This reduced the time the task from 38minutes to 26minutes: Task 11361409

Any suggestions how to get above 90%?

If I look at your task: http://setiweb.ssl.berkeley.edu/beta/result.php?resultid=11361409

I see:
Used GPU device parameters are:
Number of compute units: 14
Single buffer allocation size: 64MB
max WG size: 256

Switch -sbs 512 and Single buffer allocation size: 64MB is the same if I have understood it right.

Anyone can correct me here please???

Shouldn't -sbs be set to 128 or possible 256 for an 6870??

There is no signs in stderr that app recived any params at all. So it uses defaults.
-sbs N should result in message about new value + value actually used will be reported as "single buffer ..."

It is set to 512.

Used GPU device parameters are:
Number of compute units: 14
Single buffer allocation size: 256MB

Used GPU device parameters are:
Number of compute units: 14
Single buffer allocation size: 512MB

He changed it to 256 first and then 512.

---

With each crime and every kindness we birth our future.

Shouldn't -sbs be set to 128 or possible 256 for an 6870??

With -sbs 256 you should see speedup ~5% - 10%.

MB7_win_x86_SSE_OpenCL_ATi_r1643.exe -period_iterations_num 15 -verbose -hp -sbs 64 :
Elapsed 96.181 secs
CPU 36.676 secs

MB7_win_x86_SSE_OpenCL_ATi_r1643.exe -period_iterations_num 15 -verbose -hp -sbs 256 :
Elapsed 90.480 secs, speedup: 5.93% ratio: 1.06
CPU 31.403 secs, speedup: 14.38% ratio: 1.17

MB7_win_x86_SSE_OpenCL_ATi_r1643.exe -period_iterations_num 15 -verbose -hp -sbs 512 :
Elapsed 248.997 secs, speedup: -158.88% ratio: 0.39
CPU 34.632 secs, speedup: 5.57% ratio: 1.06

As you can see -sbs 512 is waste of time.
Even with my 18 CU`s

---

With each crime and every kindness we birth our future.

EDIT: btw, -unroll param doesn't defined for MB7 app and ignored. Remove it, it's for AP6 app.

Ok, I removed it, thanks :)

It is set to 512.

Used GPU device parameters are:
Number of compute units: 14
Single buffer allocation size: 256MB

Used GPU device parameters are:
Number of compute units: 14
Single buffer allocation size: 512MB

He changed it to 256 first and then 512.

Yes, I played a bit with the values before I let it run for most of its part.

MB7_win_x86_SSE_OpenCL_ATi_r1643.exe -period_iterations_num 15 -verbose -hp -sbs 512 :
Elapsed 248.997 secs, speedup: -158.88% ratio: 0.39
CPU 34.632 secs, speedup: 5.57% ratio: 1.06

As you can see -sbs 512 is waste of time.
Even with my 18 CU`s

How can it be, that it's slower with 512MB than 256MB? My GPU Ram never got above 750MB (of 1GB), so I don't see any reason why going lower decreases calculation time.

How can it be, that it's slower with 512MB than 256MB? My GPU Ram never got above 750MB (of 1GB), so I don't see any reason why going lower decreases calculation time.

It can and will be quite simple.
Short answer - balance between CU load and memory subsystem load.
More advanced explanation: when app uses bigger memory amount it launches more separate workitems to do less iterations per workitem.
While GPU engine not fully loaded it will be benefical.
From some point all GPU processing elements are busy already and new workitems just go in queue (this will not increase but also not decrease performance per se). But each workitem requires some initial data to be fetched from GPU memory.
The more number of workitems the more data should be read. While all workitems become immediatelly active GPU hardware can use broadcast mechanisms to supply required value to many workitems at once, GPU memory subsystem load stays low.
But when workitem go in queue first and become active only after some awaiting it needs to fetch GPU memory from scratch, increasing GPU memory subsystem load.

I tried one workunit with sbs 256 and it seemed to be faster.

Did you try values between 256 and 512, like 384 on your HD69xx?

I tried one workunit with sbs 256 and it seemed to be faster.

Did you try values between 256 and 512, like 384 on your HD69xx?

I did.
256 is fastest.

---

With each crime and every kindness we birth our future.

Is there a FAQ, readme, or something, that lists all the parameters, and the value ranges? I asked before, and was told to look at the lunatics forum. I looked there, but I was never able to find it.

---

Dublin, California
Team: SETI.USA